Assessment of Workers’ Exposure to Grain Dust and Bioaerosols During the Loading of Vessels’ Hold: An Example at a Port in the Province of Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Longshoremen are exposed to large amounts of grain dust while loading of grain into the holds of vessels. Grain dust inhalation has been linked to respiratory diseases such as chronic bronchitis, hypersensitivity, pneumonitis, and toxic pneumonitis. Our objective was to characterize the exposure of longshoremen to inhalable and total dust, endotoxins, and cultivable bacteria and fungi during the loading of grain in a vessel's hold at the Port of Montreal in order to assess the potential health risks. Sampling campaigns were conducted during the loading of two different types of grain (wheat and corn). Environmental samples of microorganisms (bacteria, fungus, and actinomycetes) were taken near the top opening of the ship's holds while personal breathing zone measurements of dust and endotoxins were sampled during the worker's 5-hour shifts. Our study show that all measurements are above the recommendations with concentration going up to 390 mg m-3 of total dust, 89 mg m-3 of inhalable fraction, 550 000 EU m-3 of endotoxins, 20 000 CFU m-3 of bacteria, 61 000 CFU m-3 of fungus and 2500 CFU m-3 of actinomycetes. In conclusion, longshoremen are exposed to very high levels of dust and of microorganisms and their components during grain loading work. Protective equipment needs to be enforced for all workers during such tasks in order to reduce their exposure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".